Novel Antireflux "RELIEF" Stent to Prevent Vesicoureteral Reflux.

OBJECTIVE: To assess efficacy, comfort, and symptoms of a novel ureteral stent (RELIEF) substituting the distal semirigid coil of a traditional double-J for a floating, monofilament tether allowing coaptation of the ureteral orifice. Ureteral instrumentation notoriously cause discomfort, urgency, frequency, dysuria, and hematuria; prolonged morbidity is likely related to stent-associated vesicoureteral reflux (VUR). We hypothesized this design would eliminate VUR, be safe and provide comfort following intervention. METHODS: Twenty-eight patients within a single institution were enrolled. Passive cystography was performed pre- and post-stent placement assessing VUR. Patients completed Ureteric Stent Symptoms Questionnaires (USSQ) before placement (baseline), postop day 1, and day of removal. RESULTS: Twenty RELIEF stents were placed (11 female and 9 male). 95% demonstrated no VUR following placement. No unexpected adverse complications occurred; 1 patient opted for early stent removal for significant discomfort. Average total USSQ scores demonstrated statistically significant improvement between first and third surveys (P < .001). Statistically significant improvement in body pain, general health, and work performance scores were noted as well (P < .05). CONCLUSION: The RELIEF stent eliminates VUR with similar stent-related morbidity and overall well-tolerance. RELIEF-associated USSQ scores were below published mean symptom scores for standard double-J stents and appear safe in this preliminary clinical trial.

Legal Outcomes of Litigation After Iatrogenic Genitourinary Trauma.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate plaintiff and defendant characteristics associated with iatrogenic genitourinary (GU) trauma litigation and outcomes of closed claims. METHODS: LexisNexis was queried in April 2023 using terms related to GU organs and injury, and manually reviewed for iatrogenic cases. Case details including defendant, organ involvement, and legal outcome were obtained. Multinomial regression analysis was performed to identify factors associated with outcome. RESULTS: Four hundred ten cases involving 611 defendants were identified, with the ureter the most commonly affected organ (202/410, 49.3%). Most cases involved adult plaintiffs (380, 92.7%) and resulted in favor of the defense (227, 55.4%). Injuries resulted most frequently from gynecologic surgeries (179, 43.7%). Defendants were most commonly obstetricians/gynecologists (243/611, 39.8%) and urologists (168, 27.5%). Penile (OR 6.3 [95% CI 2.5-16.1]) and urethral (OR 4.8 [2.0-11.7]) injuries were associated with greater odds of a plaintiff verdict relative to ureter injury. A plaintiff verdict was also more likely when defendants were academic hospitals compared to individual practitioners (OR 4.3 [1.9-9.9]). In cases ruling in favor of the plaintiff, indemnity payments were larger when the defendants were comprised of individual practitioners compared to a hospital or medical group (median $549,613 vs $250,000, P <.001). CONCLUSION: Urologists may be involved in medical malpractice lawsuits for iatrogenic injury even when they are uninvolved in the index procedure. Most cases that reach litigation result in defense verdicts regardless of the GU organ injured. Defendant characteristics associated with plaintiff verdicts are more nuanced, and providers should be aware of potential downstream effects of litigation.

Use of the Alvarado Score in Elderly Patients with Complicated and Uncomplicated Appendicitis.

The purpose of this study was to determine whether the Alvarado score is beneficial in identifying complicated versus uncomplicated acute appendicitis in elderly patients. A retrospective review was conducted of patients aged 65 years and older who underwent an appendectomy for pathologically confirmed appendicitis. A review of 310 operative reports and patient charts from October 2012 to December 2016 yielded 216 patients. Patients were grouped based on complicated versus uncomplicated appendicitis. One hundred ten patients had complicated appendicitis, whereas 106 patients were uncomplicated. Among the complicated appendicitis patients, 76.4 per cent were perforated, 38.2 per cent were gangrenous, and 34.5 per cent had an abscess. The complicated appendicitis group had a higher mean duration of symptoms (2.70 ± 3.41 days vs 2.09 ± 3.08 days, P = 0.011). Appendectomies that were open or converted to open were more likely to be associated with complicated appendicitis (75% vs 48%, P = 0.012). Mean hospital length of stay was greater in those with complicated appendicitis (5.34 ± 5.56 days vs 3.12 ± 2.86 days, P < 0.001). The two groups did not differ on mean Alvarado score (complicated = 6.96 ± 1.99 vs uncomplicated = 6.72 ± 1.85, P = 0.36). Only 62.5 per cent of patients had an Alvarado score that met the cutoff for acute appendicitis. The Alvarado score was not able to differentiate complicated from uncomplicated appendicitis in elderly patients.